Topic: New Official AMT Thread - page 106. (Read 149454 times)
It's 5PM so where is this update you speak of?
That statement COULD be used to enforce the MPP. But by itself is not an explicit mention of it. If its being addressed in court and we get something more out of it to address this then great. If not well best we can hope for is to walk away with our hardware. But its clearly stated that they did misrepresent things and now have to compensate for that. As they have not addressed the MPP yet we don't know what is going on there. It would be good for us to know what we are getting in regards to that.
Ignoring the existence of the MPP is in fact a misrepresentation of what they sold to customers.
Advertising and even proclaiming that you would ship on February and falsely stating that you've shipped hundreds of units is also a misrepresentation.
I seriously doubt that the plaintiffs that are extremely upset as to how AMT has misrepresented the facts will allow AMT easily settle on a lesser delivery that what was advertised.
Right. That is all accurate. At this point we just wait to see what AMT says and address it accordingly.
That statement COULD be used to enforce the MPP. But by itself is not an explicit mention of it. If its being addressed in court and we get something more out of it to address this then great. If not well best we can hope for is to walk away with our hardware. But its clearly stated that they did misrepresent things and now have to compensate for that. As they have not addressed the MPP yet we don't know what is going on there. It would be good for us to know what we are getting in regards to that.
Ignoring the existence of the MPP is in fact a misrepresentation of what they sold to customers.
Advertising and even proclaiming that you would ship on February and falsely stating that you've shipped hundreds of units is also a misrepresentation.
I seriously doubt that the plaintiffs, who are extremely upset as to how AMT has misrepresented the facts, will allow AMT easily settle on a lesser delivery that what was advertised.
Well, I'm sure the lawyers are all negotiating this in the background.
Burn it tests?
Are you freakin encouraging AMT to mine with our boards?
HELL YES! Are you freakin encouraging AMT to mine with our boards?Do you know of another way they can be tested under load? Dinna think so...
They could either contact us for a pool address & worker name/pw or just use testcoins.
Yes, you have a very responsive RMA system. Do a quick test on the system, ship customer units and quickly do a replacement if they do fail.
Heck, this entire business is about quickly responding to customers problems.
At this late stage of the game, there is just no luxury to see if these technobit boards are perfect.
Every time a machine fails, it is at the expense of a customer having lost mining wages.
(honestly.... this is a lousy business to be in)
a 3-4 hour test is more than enough time to get a feel for whether the chip will fail. I think with as long as we have been waiting for working hardware 3-4 hours is not so bad. Would you seriously be ok with a repeat of the last design? No testing get the hardware start mining and POOF?! I mean dude you really gotta think that one through a bit. Of course we want the miners now. But think about if it does fail....then what? You are down for days while you get it replaced all because you opted to not have it tested well befoer hand. Good QA means better engineering which leads to a better product which leads to a better customer experience. If you skimp on that QA which is what happened with AMT's previous design (obviously) this is what happens.
Burn it tests? Are you freakin encouraging AMT to mine with our boards?
HELL YES! Are you freakin encouraging AMT to mine with our boards?Do you know of another way they can be tested under load to make sure the djinn doesn't get angry and release its majik smoke? Dinna think so...
They could either contact us for a pool address & worker name/pw or just use testcoins.
Seriously yea...we want these things tested. But yea they could reach out to us and make it an added value thing so our specific miners have our preferred settings already in. It would be a nice added touch on top of things. Or yea use testcoins.
Burn it tests? Are you freakin encouraging AMT to mine with our boards?
HELL YES! Are you freakin encouraging AMT to mine with our boards?Do you know of another way they can be tested under load? Dinna think so...
They could either contact us for a pool address & worker name/pw or just use testcoins.
Yes, you have a very responsive RMA system. Do a quick test on the system, ship customer units and quickly do a replacement if they do fail.
Heck, this entire business is about quickly responding to customers problems.
At this late stage of the game, there is just no luxury to see if these technobit boards are perfect.
Every time a machine fails, it is at the expense of a customer having lost mining wages.
(honestly.... this is a lousy business to be in)
Too much entitlement man. They at bare minimum from a legal perspective would need to fulfill what they need to to satisfy the legal complaint. There is no part of the legal complaint that states they need to make good on the MPP....which explains how they appear to dodge that question when it comes up. If you really feel so strong about it might want to start a separate complaint or work with the legal team of the class action to amend the complaint. It might be too late for that. I am just looking at this as it is not as I would want it to be. Believe me I really wish we could all get the MPP fulfilled and the hardware we are supposed to get based on that. But unless AMT states otherwise and definitively it's not likely happening.
I am looking at this pragmatically from a legal perspective...not from what I would like to have. At best all we can hope for is that we get the THs we paid for.
I am looking at this pragmatically from a legal perspective...not from what I would like to have. At best all we can hope for is that we get the THs we paid for.
Here are snippets of the legal complaint:
Quote
In their Complaint, Plaintiffs allege they and hundreds of other AMT customers ordered and paid for bitcoin miners which they never received from AMT. After weeks and months of undue delay, Plaintiffs unsuccessfully attempted to cancel their orders and get refunds. As a result, Plaintiffs allege economic damages including, but not limited to, loss of the purchase price and the lost opportunity to mine bitcoins.
According to the Complaint, AMT’s alleged conduct amounted to unfair, deceptive and fraudulent business practices, a breach of contract, a breach of express warranty, common law fraud, negligent misrepresentation, breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing, unjust enrichment, and violations of various state consumer protection laws. The Complaint alleges that by concealing material facts and making false and misleading statements, AMT was able to wrongfully acquire millions of dollars from customers since mid-2013.
According to the Complaint, AMT’s alleged conduct amounted to unfair, deceptive and fraudulent business practices, a breach of contract, a breach of express warranty, common law fraud, negligent misrepresentation, breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing, unjust enrichment, and violations of various state consumer protection laws. The Complaint alleges that by concealing material facts and making false and misleading statements, AMT was able to wrongfully acquire millions of dollars from customers since mid-2013.
So the MPP is implicitly invoked in the wording of "the lost opportunity to mine bitcoins".
So the math is clear, return the purchase price ($6,000) and the revenue loss due to mining (2 months worth).
So I have no idea which legal complaint you are referring to here?
I don't think the plaintiffs are going to play nice here and let AMT get off the hook so easily.
That statement COULD be used to enforce the MPP. But by itself is not an explicit mention of it. If its being addressed in court and we get something more out of it to address this then great. If not well best we can hope for is to walk away with our hardware. But its clearly stated that they did misrepresent things and now have to compensate for that. As they have not addressed the MPP yet we don't know what is going on there. It would be good for us to know what we are getting in regards to that.
Burn it tests? Are you freakin encouraging AMT to mine with our boards?
HELL YES! Are you freakin encouraging AMT to mine with our boards?Do you know of another way they can be tested under load to make sure the djinn doesn't get angry and release its majik smoke? Dinna think so...
They could either contact us for a pool address & worker name/pw or just use testcoins.
IF and this is a huge IF we get that timeline you said.....we would be fortunate to get what we paid for. Hopefully AMT is doing something to make it up to us. But at this point its not looking likely. We don't know the terms yet for these options. They did say their lawyers were vetting or prepping the info and getting us something today so I am looking forward to that and hoping for a result.
I do wonder if their lawyers have seen the MPP and understand the obligations of AMT to its customers.
It is more than delivering miners that meet specifications, it requires proving an ROI based on the promised shipping days.
The only realistic ROI is to refund the money paid.
Anywhere here is AMT's technobit board just in case you missed it:
@AMT
Seeing that image....a concern was brought up....how will those be cooled? Looking at the designs marto74 has they have pretty large heatsinks and fans.....how much different will be the cooling solution for this reworked design? Will it be the same as technobits? or will it be similar to the old design? What sort of burn in tests will be performed to ensure we dont get miners that burst into flames?
Burn it tests?
Are you freakin encouraging AMT to mine with our boards? Too much entitlement man. They at bare minimum from a legal perspective would need to fulfill what they need to to satisfy the legal complaint. There is no part of the legal complaint that states they need to make good on the MPP....which explains how they appear to dodge that question when it comes up. If you really feel so strong about it might want to start a separate complaint or work with the legal team of the class action to amend the complaint. It might be too late for that. I am just looking at this as it is not as I would want it to be. Believe me I really wish we could all get the MPP fulfilled and the hardware we are supposed to get based on that. But unless AMT states otherwise and definitively it's not likely happening.
I am looking at this pragmatically from a legal perspective...not from what I would like to have. At best all we can hope for is that we get the THs we paid for.
I am looking at this pragmatically from a legal perspective...not from what I would like to have. At best all we can hope for is that we get the THs we paid for.
Here are snippets of the legal complaint:
Quote
In their Complaint, Plaintiffs allege they and hundreds of other AMT customers ordered and paid for bitcoin miners which they never received from AMT. After weeks and months of undue delay, Plaintiffs unsuccessfully attempted to cancel their orders and get refunds. As a result, Plaintiffs allege economic damages including, but not limited to, loss of the purchase price and the lost opportunity to mine bitcoins.
According to the Complaint, AMT’s alleged conduct amounted to unfair, deceptive and fraudulent business practices, a breach of contract, a breach of express warranty, common law fraud, negligent misrepresentation, breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing, unjust enrichment, and violations of various state consumer protection laws. The Complaint alleges that by concealing material facts and making false and misleading statements, AMT was able to wrongfully acquire millions of dollars from customers since mid-2013.
According to the Complaint, AMT’s alleged conduct amounted to unfair, deceptive and fraudulent business practices, a breach of contract, a breach of express warranty, common law fraud, negligent misrepresentation, breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing, unjust enrichment, and violations of various state consumer protection laws. The Complaint alleges that by concealing material facts and making false and misleading statements, AMT was able to wrongfully acquire millions of dollars from customers since mid-2013.
So the MPP is implicitly invoked in the wording of "the lost opportunity to mine bitcoins".
So the math is clear, return the purchase price ($6,000) and the revenue loss due to mining (2 months worth).
So I have no idea which legal complaint you are referring to here?
I don't think the plaintiffs are going to play nice here and let AMT get off the hook so easily.
IF and this is a huge IF we get that timeline you said.....we would be fortunate to get what we paid for. Hopefully AMT is doing something to make it up to us. But at this point its not looking likely. We don't know the terms yet for these options. They did say their lawyers were vetting or prepping the info and getting us something today so I am looking forward to that and hoping for a result.
I do wonder if their lawyers have seen the MPP and understand the obligations of AMT to its customers.
It is more than delivering miners that meet specifications, it requires proving an ROI based on the promised shipping days.
The only realistic ROI is to refund the money paid.
Anywhere here is AMT's technobit board just in case you missed it:
@AMT
Seeing that image....a concern was brought up....how will those be cooled? Looking at the designs marto74 has they have pretty large heatsinks and fans.....how much different will be the cooling solution for this reworked design? Will it be the same as technobits? or will it be similar to the old design? What sort of burn in tests will be performed to ensure we dont get miners that burst into flames?
IF and this is a huge IF we get that timeline you said.....we would be fortunate to get what we paid for. Hopefully AMT is doing something to make it up to us. But at this point its not looking likely. We don't know the terms yet for these options. They did say their lawyers were vetting or prepping the info and getting us something today so I am looking forward to that and hoping for a result.
I do wonder if their lawyers have seen the MPP and understand the obligations of AMT to its customers.
It is more than delivering miners that meet specifications, it requires proving an ROI based on the promised shipping days.
The only realistic ROI is to refund the money paid.
The MPP is vague in terms. But valid for everyone. It might be why they locked down sales....after they fulfill our orders and make good on the MPP as well, they legally will have fulfilled all their obligations to us and could remove the MPP altogether. The class action however would need to have covered that. (whether or not we registered with it it still applies to us might be something to read). The class action complaint did not cover the MPP. So (IMO as I'm not a lawyer) we are at AMT's mercy on that point. If they give us something extra as a thank you for sticking it out...I would personally consider that as fulfillment of the MPP in spirit if not letter. I don't think I am wrong in saying we all just want to move on past this and just get working hardware ASAP. But having something extra at least helps restore some credibility as it is something they advertised.
How is it that AMT is dictating the terms that customer presumably accept?
Should we as customers not have a say as to what is acceptable considering the delays?
At this time, considering that competitors are selling 1 THs systems for $3,000, it would be only fair that people are compensated with systems that total at least 2 THs.
A tehnobit unit of 240 GHs ( http://technobit.eu/index.php?id_product=63&controller=product&id_lang=1 ) costs around $700. Four of them that hits 1.12 THs would cost $2,800. There is still a $3,200 discrepancy here. Also note that the technobit price does not include power supplies.
Too much entitlement man. They at bare minimum from a legal perspective would need to fulfill what they need to to satisfy the legal complaint. There is no part of the legal complaint that states they need to make good on the MPP....which explains how they appear to dodge that question when it comes up. If you really feel so strong about it might want to start a separate complaint or work with the legal team of the class action to amend the complaint. It might be too late for that. I am just looking at this as it is not as I would want it to be. Believe me I really wish we could all get the MPP fulfilled and the hardware we are supposed to get based on that. But unless AMT states otherwise and definitively it's not likely happening.
I am looking at this pragmatically from a legal perspective...not from what I would like to have. At best all we can hope for is that we get the THs we paid for.
IF and this is a huge IF we get that timeline you said.....we would be fortunate to get what we paid for. Hopefully AMT is doing something to make it up to us. But at this point its not looking likely. We don't know the terms yet for these options. They did say their lawyers were vetting or prepping the info and getting us something today so I am looking forward to that and hoping for a result.
I do wonder if their lawyers have seen the MPP and understand the obligations of AMT to its customers.
It is more than delivering miners that meet specifications, it requires proving an ROI based on the promised shipping days.
The only realistic ROI is to refund the money paid.
The MPP is vague in terms. But valid for everyone. It might be why they locked down sales....after they fulfill our orders and make good on the MPP as well, they legally will have fulfilled all their obligations to us and could remove the MPP altogether. The class action however would need to have covered that. (whether or not we registered with it it still applies to us might be something to read). The class action complaint did not cover the MPP. So (IMO as I'm not a lawyer) we are at AMT's mercy on that point. If they give us something extra as a thank you for sticking it out...I would personally consider that as fulfillment of the MPP in spirit if not letter. I don't think I am wrong in saying we all just want to move on past this and just get working hardware ASAP. But having something extra at least helps restore some credibility as it is something they advertised.
How is it that AMT is dictating the terms that customer presumably accept?
Should we as customers not have a say as to what is acceptable considering the delays?
At this time, considering that competitors are selling 1 THs systems for $3,000, it would be only fair that people are compensated with systems that total at least 2 THs.
A tehnobit unit of 240 GHs ( http://technobit.eu/index.php?id_product=63&controller=product&id_lang=1 ) costs around $700. Five of them that hits 1.2 THs would cost $3,500. There is still a $2,500 discrepancy here. Also note that the technobit price does not include power supplies.
Also likely the thermal grease on the other side was not very well applied either. Again real cut rate work to keep costs down. This is usually how some houses operate, AMT already made that much clear in this situation. But in either case we are paying the price. Seeing as they are now providing us with options...lets hope these options dont take us months of waiting again. I dont think I want to deal with that hassle. I still have the question....What is the timeline for the technobit solution?
1. Missing parts
2. Both rigs dead
3.no powersupply
4. he put a scotch tape on a heat LCD panel on the back to hold it on place,... which is ghetto.
5. He never test them.
6. Boards have X on them mean they have failed testing and he still gave me.
He stole the money bro from us..But soon he is going to spend those money after they (Josh and Jim) gets out of 20 years of prison for fraud!
I am waiting it out for todays annoucement to see where they are going. Being that they currently have a lawsuit against them its imperative that they keep to any commitments they make at this point. One was an annoucement for us today. Considering the circumstances I doubt they are running off with our money. If it was that easy to do it would be done by many far larger corporations that get class actions leveled against them. It appears they are looking to settle and they are working with an industry known designer to make things happen. So we may see some valid results now. The biggest question is when? And hopefully this upcoming announcement for today answers that question.
Also likely the thermal grease on the other side was not very well applied either. Again real cut rate work to keep costs down. This is usually how some houses operate, AMT already made that much clear in this situation. But in either case we are paying the price. Seeing as they are now providing us with options...lets hope these options dont take us months of waiting again. I dont think I want to deal with that hassle. I still have the question....What is the timeline for the technobit solution?
The timeline would be around 2 weeks if you can get your A1 chips to Technobit.eu to have it assembled by them.
I've got zero confidence that AMT has the personnel to actually deliver anything on schedule.
Let's just list the 'little' things they forgot to do:
(1) Forgot to put adequate padding on the shipment.
(2) Forgot to include a backplane.
(3) Forgot to ship a missing backplane.
(4) Forgot to include basic instructions to wire up the system.
(5) Forgot to accept a returned package (3) times.
That's just the logistics part of shipping a supposedly working unit. How about the assembly part.
(1) Forgot to test the system prior to shipping.
(2) Forgot to apply thermal paste properly.
(3) Used the smallest possible heatshink
(4) Forgot to align the boards so that the backplane could fit.
(5) Never figured out how to provide enough power for 1.2 THs boards. BTW... where is that backplane that was supposed to power 6 boards... I guess it never existed.. in short AMT never had a chance of delivering a 1.2 THs system.
To conclude, despite the best efforts of AMT to come up with something... a 1.2 TH/S that was advertised never existed!
No proof of a working system. No proof of a 6 board system.
1. Missing parts
2. Both rigs dead
3.no powersupply
4. he put a scotch tape on a heat LCD panel on the back to hold it on place,... which is ghetto.
5. He never test them.
6. Boards have X on them mean they have failed testing and he still gave me.
He stole the money bro from us..But soon he is going to spend those money after they (Josh and Jim) gets out of 20 years of prison for fraud!
Do you have photographs? Keep the evidence.
The fact they were so negligent previously doesn't give me much confidence even if they finally licensed a working design.
Also likely the thermal grease on the other side was not very well applied either. Again real cut rate work to keep costs down. This is usually how some houses operate, AMT already made that much clear in this situation. But in either case we are paying the price. Seeing as they are now providing us with options...lets hope these options dont take us months of waiting again. I dont think I want to deal with that hassle. I still have the question....What is the timeline for the technobit solution?
The timeline would be around 2 weeks if you can get your A1 chips to Technobit.eu to have it assembled by them.
I've got zero confidence that AMT has the personnel to actually deliver anything on schedule.
Let's just list the 'little' things they forgot to do:
(1) Forgot to put adequate padding on the shipment.
(2) Forgot to include a backplane.
(3) Forgot to ship a missing backplane.
(4) Forgot to include basic instructions to wire up the system.
(5) Forgot to accept a returned package (3) times.
That's just the logistics part of shipping a supposedly working unit. How about the assembly part.
(1) Forgot to test the system prior to shipping.
(2) Forgot to apply thermal paste properly.
(3) Used the smallest possible heatshink
(4) Forgot to align the boards so that the backplane could fit.
(5) Never figured out how to provide enough power for 1.2 THs boards. BTW... where is that backplane that was supposed to power 6 boards... I guess it never existed.. in short AMT never had a chance of delivering a 1.2 THs system.
To conclude, despite the best efforts of AMT to come up with something... a 1.2 TH/S that was advertised never existed!
No proof of a working system. No proof of a 6 board system.
1. Missing parts
2. Both rigs dead
3.no powersupply
4. he put a scotch tape on a heat LCD panel on the back to hold it on place,... which is ghetto.
5. He never test them.
6. Boards have X on them mean they have failed testing and he still gave me.
He stole the money bro from us..But soon he is going to spend those money after they (Josh and Jim) gets out of 20 years of prison for fraud!
IF and this is a huge IF we get that timeline you said.....we would be fortunate to get what we paid for. Hopefully AMT is doing something to make it up to us. But at this point its not looking likely. We don't know the terms yet for these options. They did say their lawyers were vetting or prepping the info and getting us something today so I am looking forward to that and hoping for a result.
I do wonder if their lawyers have seen the MPP and understand the obligations of AMT to its customers.
It is more than delivering miners that meet specifications, it requires proving an ROI based on the promised shipping days.
The only realistic ROI is to refund the money paid.
The MPP is vague in terms. But valid for everyone. It might be why they locked down sales....after they fulfill our orders and make good on the MPP as well, they legally will have fulfilled all their obligations to us and could remove the MPP altogether. The class action however would need to have covered that. (whether or not we registered with it it still applies to us might be something to read). The class action complaint did not cover the MPP. So (IMO as I'm not a lawyer) we are at AMT's mercy on that point. If they give us something extra as a thank you for sticking it out...I would personally consider that as fulfillment of the MPP in spirit if not letter. I don't think I am wrong in saying we all just want to move on past this and just get working hardware ASAP. But having something extra at least helps restore some credibility as it is something they advertised.
IF and this is a huge IF we get that timeline you said.....we would be fortunate to get what we paid for. Hopefully AMT is doing something to make it up to us. But at this point its not looking likely. We don't know the terms yet for these options. They did say their lawyers were vetting or prepping the info and getting us something today so I am looking forward to that and hoping for a result.
I do wonder if their lawyers have seen the MPP and understand the obligations of AMT to its customers.
It is more than delivering miners that meet specifications, it requires proving an ROI based on the promised shipping days.
The only realistic ROI is to refund the money paid.
Anywhere here is AMT's technobit board just in case you missed it:
Oh man.. not looking good!
AMT entrusted to do the production and assembly! I would have preferred that they ship units directly from technobit. The delay to ship from Europe would likely less than the delays that AMT is known for.
BTW, how many boards will be needed to reach 1.2 THs?
AMT entrusted to do the production and assembly! I would have preferred that they ship units directly from technobit. The delay to ship from Europe would likely less than the delays that AMT is known for.
BTW, how many boards will be needed to reach 1.2 THs?
That is not necessarily true (e.g, it could be great news, depending). A company like Flexitron could probably do 1000 or many times that boards in a day without breaking a sweat. Probably much faster, with better QA and at lower cost, than even a high quality specialized vendor could do. The problem is in setting up the assembly line, and lead times.
So the questions to ask are:
(1) Is the techno bits licensed design fully developed, tested, and ready to go, or will a testing phase be needed? IS the PCB design already in layout ready to be printed?
(2) Who is doing the PCB board manufacture and soldering? Do they have all parts in hand or will there be a lead time and if so what is that?
(3) When will assembly start and how many boards can be finished and tested per day?
(4) What are specs on the techno bit boards? Are they a design that is already being sold or a new AMT only design?
(5) Are there any post-board assembly tasks that will not be performed by the assembler? E.g., will the hashing chips need to be mounted separately, or will AMT ship those out to be mounted too? and how long before assembler has all parts in hadn and can start therefore?
(6) Has contract been signed with assembly shop or is it still under negotiation? Are there hard and fast dates and volumes in the contract or is it a reasonable efforts type contract?
What he said....+1
Overall questions though is timeline. We need to know this is going to be ready in a very fashion and if not what compensation is going to be offered for our trouble. But from Marto's post it looks like they are just using his reference design and assembling the hardware. Like you said might not be a bad thing if they don't deviate from the design and just get us working hardware ASAP. With the questions above answered and a realistic timeline on delivery we can at least weigh our options better.
AMT should have asked Technobit to ship to their severly delayed customers!
How many more months do we have to wait for AMT to get their act together.
Best case estimate right now is that they ship in 3 weeks. In 3 weeks time, you can get a 1 THs miner for $1,500.
Is AMT going to send us 5 x 4 = 20 of these Technobit boards??
IF and this is a huge IF we get that timeline you said.....we would be fortunate to get what we paid for. Hopefully AMT is doing something to make it up to us. But at this point its not looking likely. We don't know the terms yet for these options. They did say their lawyers were vetting or prepping the info and getting us something today so I am looking forward to that and hoping for a result.
Oh man.. not looking good!
AMT entrusted to do the production and assembly! I would have preferred that they ship units directly from technobit. The delay to ship from Europe would likely less than the delays that AMT is known for.
BTW, how many boards will be needed to reach 1.2 THs?
AMT entrusted to do the production and assembly! I would have preferred that they ship units directly from technobit. The delay to ship from Europe would likely less than the delays that AMT is known for.
BTW, how many boards will be needed to reach 1.2 THs?
That is not necessarily true (e.g, it could be great news, depending). A company like Flexitron could probably do 1000 or many times that boards in a day without breaking a sweat. Probably much faster, with better QA and at lower cost, than even a high quality specialized vendor could do. The problem is in setting up the assembly line, and lead times.
So the questions to ask are:
(1) Is the techno bits licensed design fully developed, tested, and ready to go, or will a testing phase be needed? IS the PCB design already in layout ready to be printed?
(2) Who is doing the PCB board manufacture and soldering? Do they have all parts in hand or will there be a lead time and if so what is that?
(3) When will assembly start and how many boards can be finished and tested per day?
(4) What are specs on the techno bit boards? Are they a design that is already being sold or a new AMT only design?
(5) Are there any post-board assembly tasks that will not be performed by the assembler? E.g., will the hashing chips need to be mounted separately, or will AMT ship those out to be mounted too? and how long before assembler has all parts in hadn and can start therefore?
(6) Has contract been signed with assembly shop or is it still under negotiation? Are there hard and fast dates and volumes in the contract or is it a reasonable efforts type contract?
What he said....+1
Overall questions though is timeline. We need to know this is going to be ready in a very fashion and if not what compensation is going to be offered for our trouble. But from Marto's post it looks like they are just using his reference design and assembling the hardware. Like you said might not be a bad thing if they don't deviate from the design and just get us working hardware ASAP. With the questions above answered and a realistic timeline on delivery we can at least weigh our options better.
AMT should have asked Technobit to ship to their severly delayed customers!
How many more months do we have to wait for AMT to get their act together.
Best case estimate right now is that they ship in 3 weeks. In 3 weeks time, you can get a 1 THs miner for $1,500.
Is AMT going to send us 5 x 4 = 20 of these Technobit boards??
Jump to: